There really isn’t much here except the usual chatter of myopic Pundits, Ganesh and Barber, looking at the second defeat of the Tories, in such a short period of Political Time: Cameron’s vote was on June 23, 2016! How can the Tories be so utterly out of touch with the prevailing political mood of the electorate? I put this in italics because this is the kind of rhetoric used by the Financial Times headline writers, and its stable of ‘Free Market’ apologists. The dissatisfaction of the disenfranchised young voter garners a mention as the engine of Corbyn’s almost victory of the perennial back-bencher.

I received this from The New York Times this morning, a short, for want of a better term, analysis, of the British Election by David Leonhardt, Op-Ed Columnist. The title of which could very well be ‘The Revenge of The Young’. Mr. Leonhardt being a house broken Neo-Liberal, he uses the standard misdirection of the vengeful young, instead of the abject failure of The Free Market Mythology, to bring about the Brave New World imagined by the Trinity of Hayek/Mises/Friedman. Mr. Leonhardt and the duo of Ganesh/Barber are in agreement on the fact that the ‘young voter’ is the villain of this episode of the continuing British Political Melodrama. I quote, in part, from the New York Times e mail:

(Formatting could not be removed)

Young people in the United States and Britain have something in common. They’re both living with a political reality that they don’t like.

In the United States, voters under 30 preferred Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump by a landslide margin. In Britain, the under-30 vote overwhelmingly rejected Brexit and wanted to remain in Europe.

But now it looks like young Brits, at least, may be starting to take their revenge. In a shocking result, Britain’s Conservative Party, led by Theresa May, failed to win a majority last night. It remains the largest party, yet its surprisingly poor showing leaves the country’s political situation unclear. May’s own future as the Conservative leader is in doubt, as are Brexit negotiations.

Early signs suggest that a surge in the turnout of younger voters — who backed Labour and its proudly leftist leader, Jeremy Corbyn — explains at least part of the surprise. If so, the potential lessons for the Democratic Party will be large.

Can Democrats also translate anger among younger Americans (over Trump, rather than Brexit) into higher turnout? It would be a big deal if so, because turnout among millenials was only 49 percent last year, compared with 69 percent for baby boomers.

Perhaps the most obvious question is whether the Democrats should adopt the same unabashed populism — the real kind, not the Trump kind — that Corbyn did. For a taste of it, you can watch this brief campaign commercial. My instinct is that a bolder message from Democrats on the stagnation of middle-class living standards would make sense.

It’s important not to exaggerate the British result. The Conservatives still won more seats than Labour. Corbyn is a complicated politician, and Democrats should avoid parts of his approach. Yet last night was clearly a good night for him and the British left, and a bad one for the British right. The coming diagnosis of the surprise bears watching for the United States too.

Notice too that Leonhardt recognizes only the utterly corrupt New Democrats, led by the Clinton Coterie, as the only potential opponent of Trump and Trumpism! Ideological myopia is a transatlantic phenomenon.